This Practice Note sets out the position of an employee when the company they are employed by enters a formal insolvency process, such as compulsory liquidation, voluntary liquidation, administration, administrative receivership or the appointment of a receiver and manager by the court. It deals with what an employee’s legal position is at that point, the priority of their claim against the company for any unpaid wages and other remuneration and claims which might be made against the National Insurance Fund, HMRC and insurance. Forthcoming changes The Employment Rights Act 2025 (ERA 2025) received Royal Assent on 18 December 2025 and is being brought into force in stages. Some of the future changes it introduces are relevant to employee claims in insolvency. In particular, ERA 2025 creates new rights in relation to zero-hours and shift-working arrangements, including payment for short-notice cancellation, movement or curtailment of shifts. For insolvency purposes, ERA 2025 amends Schedule 6 to the Insolvency Act 1986 and section 184 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 so that, when the amendments

This Practice Note provides guidance on the interpretation and application of the relevant provisions of the Civil Procedure Rules (CPR). Depending on the court in which your matter is proceeding, you may also need to be mindful of additional provisions—for further guidance, see: Court specific guidance. This Practice Note provides guidance on drafting the particulars of claim for a claim brought under CPR 7. It should be read in conjunction with Practice Note: Drafting statements of case, which provides guidance on drafting statements of case in general, including formatting requirements, the need for a statement of truth, and filing of statements of case. For general information on bringing a claim under CPR 8 (alternative procedure for claims where there is no substantial dispute of fact), see Practice Note: CPR Part 8 claims (alternative procedure for claims). Particulars of claim—part of claim form or separate document? If practicable, the particulars of claim should be set out in the claim form (CPR PD 16, para 3.1). They can also be contained in a separate document (CPR 7.4(1)).

Public Law analysis: This case provides the first judicial guidance on the test for lifting an automatic suspension under section 102 of the Procurement Act 2023 (PA 2023). The Technology and Construction Court held that the new statutory regime represents a substantive departure from the American Cyanamid approach, with the adequacy of damages no longer carrying determinative weight. His Honour Judge Keyser KC emphasised that the court must balance the public interest in lawful procurement against the interests of suppliers and any other relevant considerations. Although damages were considered an adequate remedy for Parkingeye, the suspension was maintained because there was no sufficiently compelling public interest favouring contract award. The decision suggests contracting authorities may face greater difficulty obtaining orders lifting automatic suspensions under PA 2023. Produced in partnership with Sam Pringle and Ed Williams of DWF Law LLP.

EU Law analysis: This case concerns the lawfulness of mandatory collecting of customers’ titles, and incidentally their gender identity, when booking a train ticket. The Court of Justice ruled that such data collection (i) is not strictly necessary for the performance of a transport service contract and (ii) subject to an in-depth assessment of the national court, may not be justified by a valid legitimate interest of the transport company. This decision emphasises the need for any data controller to reassess its data collection practices, especially concerning personal identifiers that may not be essential for its services delivery. Written by March Schuler, partner at Taylor Wessing France, and Laura Huck, associate at Taylor Wessing France.

Jari Sotka, a Helsinki attorney has published a blog post examining arbitration in Finland and the proposed reform of the Finnish Arbitration Act. The blog post outlines the distinction between institutional arbitration administered by the Arbitration Institute of the Finland Chamber of Commerce (FAI) and ad hoc arbitration and examines how the proposed new Arbitration Act would modernise Finnish arbitration law and align it more closely with the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration. The post highlights proposed reforms including removal of the written-form requirement for arbitration agreements, express recognition of competence-competence and separability, tribunal-ordered interim measures, remote hearings, electronic awards, rules on multi-party and multi-contract disputes and abolition of the current nullity regime. The reforms are expected to enter into force in 2027.

NHS Resolution (NHSR) has announced the launch of a neutral evaluation scheme for resolving disputes, awarding initial contracts to the Centre for Effective Dispute Resolution and Trust Mediation. The scheme will cover all claims against the NHS, including clinical negligence, personal injury, costs, contract and property disputes. Under the scheme, parties agree to obtain a non-binding opinion from a neutral person, such as a former judge or KC, on the likely trial outcome. NHSR is developing selection criteria for suitable cases and expects to formally launch the scheme by end-2025. The initiative aims to reduce formal litigation, with NHSR indicating it will likely cover costs in cases where court proceedings are avoided. The announcement follows NHSR's success in resolving 83% of claims without formal proceedings in 2024/25.

The Minister for the Cabinet Office, John Glen, has responded to a question put to him by Chris Law of the Scottish National Party with regard to what assessment the government has made of the security of civil servants' pensions data following the cyber attack against Capita in March 2023. Glen responded that the Civil Service Pension Scheme (CSPS) contract has control measures in place to protect cyber security, including a set of security principles (such as no off-shoring of CSPS data and annual IT health checks), the requirement to ensure that Capita is subjected to an accreditation process before migrating any CSPS data into its infrastructure, and affording the Cabinet Office the contractual leverage to enforce both proactive and reactive controls for cyber and security data.

HM Treasury (HMT) has updated the guidance on ‘Public Sector Exit Payments: Use of Special Severance Payments’, first published in May 2021, as well as the Proforma for special severance business cases, which was first published in June 2021. A new ‘Reporting Template for Special Severance Payment Data Return’ has also been added to the guidance collection. Special severance payments are those payments paid to employees, officeholders, workers, contractors, and others outside of normal statutory or contractual requirements when leaving employment in public service whether they resign, are dismissed or reach an agreed termination of contract. HMT’s guidance details the criteria that public sector employers should consider before proposing a special severance payment and outlines the approval process required to authorise such a payment, as well as the requirements for annual reporting on special severance payments.

The Court of Appeal, in allowing an appeal, has held that a solicitor had suspended work under a retainer rather than terminating it. This case highlights how the courts will construe clauses in solicitors’ Terms of Business and also correspondence when deciding whether there has been a suspension or termination of services by a solicitor and whether notice was required. At first instance, the solicitor was found to have terminated the contract through repudiatory breach, which as it had been accepted by the client, meant the client did not have to pay the costs incurred during the period of the retainer. The Court of Appeal finding means that the client will now had to pay his solicitors costs for the work they undertook as part of the retainer.

Arbitration analysis: In Baffinland Iron Mines LP v Tower-EBC G.P., S.E.N.C, the Ontario Court of Appeal examined a principle of contractual interpretation (the presumption of consistent expression) and confined its application to a basic premise. Simply put, the court determined that, while there is a presumption that language in a contract is used consistently, this presumption does not apply to differently worded, but mutually reinforcing, phrasing with the same meaning. It concluded that, when assessing the legal effect of an arbitration agreement, that the phrases ‘finally settled’ and ‘final and binding’ had effectively the same meaning. Written by Ira Nishisato (partner), Hugh Meighen (partner), Erin Peters (senior associate) and Stéphanie Gagné (associate), of BLG Canada’s Law Firm. The authors represented TEBC before the Superior Court and Court of Appeal.

Strictly private and confidential To: [insert buyer name] [insert buyer address] Date: [insert date] Dear [insert buyer contact name], Proposed acquisition of [insert target company name] Limited 1 Introduction 1.1 We refer to our recent discussions concerning the proposed sale by [insert seller name] (Seller) of [the entire issued share capital OR [insert other description of number of shares being sold]] of [insert target company name] Limited (the Company) (the Sale Shares) to [insert buyer name] (or member of its group of companies) (the Buyer) (the Proposed Acquisition). Each of the Seller and the Buyer is a party and together they are the parties. 1.2 You have requested certain Confidential Information [(and Personal Data) ]([each as ]defined below) be made available to you, your directors, officers, employees, agents and [legal and financial advisers OR professional advisers OR advisers] in order to enable both you and them to evaluate the Company [and its subsidiaries (the Group),] and to consider and negotiate the terms of the Proposed Acquisition. In consideration for the Seller agreeing to supply, and supplying, the Confidential Information to you and your representatives

1 Definitions Biodiversity Gain • the biodiversity gain objective described in Schedule 7A of TCPA 1990, and any analogous requirement relating to biodiversity net gain; CIL • the Community Infrastructure Levy introduced by sections 205—225 of the Planning Act 2008 (and/or any equivalent form of taxation or levy); CIL Liability • the amount that the Buyer reasonably considers it will have to pay by way of CIL in respect of the Development, calculated in accordance with clause 2.2; CIL Regulations • the Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations 2010, SI 2010/948 (as amended); [Condition • the Buyer obtaining Satisfactory Planning Permission;] Development • the use of the whole or part of the Property for [insert a detailed description of the Development including the maximum and minimum number of units/floorspace etc]; Expert • a person with at least [10] years’ post qualification experience including significant relevant experience in relation to the subject matter of the dispute; Planning Acts • the statutes and statutory instruments from time to time in force relating to town and country planning; Planning Agreement • includes: (a) any agreement with the local planning or other authority (whether or not under section 106 of TCPA 1990, sections 25, 38 or 278 of the Highways